[Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

Thiago Macieira thiago at kde.org
Sat Feb 13 17:11:53 CET 2010

Em Sábado 13. Fevereiro 2010, às 16.39.57, Oswald Buddenhagen escreveu:
> i did imagine that case. but somehow i just couldn't construct an
> actually useful scenario where the parts of a *single* atomic commit
> would have to be pushed to *different* servers.

Very simple: when a part of the tree is not on Gitorious. Something like a 
3rd-party project, a kdesupport project or even part of KDE itself (like 

Anyway, when I said load balancing, I didn't imagine duplicating everything in 
two servers. You can put some repositories on server1 and some repositories on 
server2. Done, you no longer have atomicity because of a technical decision.

Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
  Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks
      PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
      E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-scm-interest/attachments/20100213/6e4d8c85/attachment.sig 

More information about the Kde-scm-interest mailing list